A Misunderstanding At the Voting Booth? Oh, wait, is this a Gun Show? Hmmm… Friday Flash 55


No Driver’s License?  Can’t let you step into that booth.

Sure, you’re registered, but no Drivee, no Votee.   See, where it says–right on that–err…

Vision impairment?

Wait – you came in here to buy firearms?

Geez, sorry, ma-am, right this way; no, this way.  And just, huh, watch where you’re pointing that thing.


The above is exactly (minus title) 55 words so do tell it to the wonderful G-Man

I must note an inaccuracy in my 55 – most of the new voter I.D. laws do not require a driver’s license, but they do require that a voter have a government-issued photo I.D. (They will not accept a student I.D. or other non=government photo I.D.s, or a non-photo government I.D. such as a social security card or a birth certificate.)  No one, even those promoting the laws, appears to have documented a significant instance of voter fraud, in the sense of ineligible persons voting.  (The places, it seems to me, where questions of fraud have been raised have been in the counting and certifying as in Florida 2000.) 

I admit also that most states also do require some form of government-issued ID for the regular purchase of a firearm.  There appears to be a pretty large “gun show loophole” to most gun laws, however, that allows for sales of guns with extremely little (or no) regulation. 

Speaking of guns, my deepest sympathies to all the victims of the shootings in my dear New York City today.  

Explore posts in the same categories: New York City, news, Uncategorized

Tags: , , , , , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

12 Comments on “A Misunderstanding At the Voting Booth? Oh, wait, is this a Gun Show? Hmmm… Friday Flash 55”

  1. brian miller Says:

    you can buy guns at the flea market…dont take much…and you can see how that plays out…glad to see you post after the day in NY…

  2. Ravenblack Says:

    That’s quite a telling skit.

    I didn’t know the US now has government issued photo IDs for its citizens.

    Got the news on what happened in New York. Tragic.

    • ManicDdaily Says:

      No, the federal government does not have photo IDS for citizens (except perhaps for people in the military). This is part of the issue in a way. Individual States issue driver’s licenses to people who drive, but if someone doesn’t drive they don’t go through the process to get one of these IDs. It is possible to get a non-driver’s ID, but it is a hassle for people, and an expense, and many people, if they don’t drive, don’t necessarily need it.

      The crazy thing is that nonpartisan and bipartisan studies have shown that there is extremely minimal voter fraud (really incredibly small) relating to false IDs. So it really does seem to be a means of blocking voting by the poor, young and elderly. k.

  3. G-Man Says:

    I really appreciate your perfect story.
    A great Statement!
    Loved your public service 55 My Friend
    Thanks for playing, thanks for your long time support, and have a Kick Ass Week-End

  4. hedgewitch Says:

    It’s amazing how these laws seem to be focused on keeping students(young liberals) poor and minority voters(democrats) from voting without an arbitrary id. Strange coincidence they’ve all been enacted by new republican legislatures. Strange how early voting, which raised democratic turnout in 2008, used to be promoted by republicans and now is being restricted. But the strangest thing of all is that no one seems to be noticing. So sorry about the fracas in New York today. The shooter’s gun was bought legally once, but not registered or legal in NY I heard. Who can keep up with the flood of firearms in this country?

    • ManicDdaily Says:

      What’s especially interesting about the shooting to me is that it looks more and more as if all of the bystanders were shot by the police. I don’t blame the police. It’s very clear that the guy pulled his gun on them and was aiming at them–there’s a surveillance video that shows the entire sequence – and the police jump back and begin shooting. I’m not sure how the police could have handled it differently.

      But what it does show (to me) is the craziness of this idea that the world would be safer if everyone was armed, because the good people could then shoot the bad people. I’m pretty sure that the police are relatively well-trained (compared to average person), and that their weapons are relatively high quality, and even in that situation (and at quite close range), they could not help but cause a fair amount of collateral damage. One can only imagine the carnage if a bunch of third parties had joined in. k.

  5. David King Says:

    Love it. Absolutely love it. It says so much about our society.

  6. How does this happen without public outcry? Talk about stealing our rights!

    • ManicDdaily Says:

      There is some public outcry – and law suits have been brought in the applicable states to overturn the laws – but there’s not enough. It is really outrageous. k.

I'd love to hear from you!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: